We Jews in Israel are teetering on the edge of a social and political cliff. How shall we live together while disagreeing about mutually exclusive goals? How much power should we give to the majority? How much tolerance are we willing to have for the minorities, and how much disinformation, repression and violence are we willing to use against them? In the answers to these questions lies the face of our democracy revealed - and it isn't a pretty picture.
The will of the masses can be wise and good, or it can be stupid and evil. After all, a majority of the nations in the world voted that Zionism is racism. A majority of Arabs assigned to the Palestinian Authority are in favor of terrorism against Jews. This limitation of wisdom in democracy is something we have faced before. We know the majority of Jews in the desert with Moses didn't want to enter Israel, a decision rued for forty years. The future is always unknown, always scary, and it is very possible for a majority to choose wrongly.
True democracy assumes that, given basic freedoms of speech, assembly and suffrage, the majority of adults will make a reasonably correct decision. However, the quality of a decision is dependent on the character of the voters and the information available to them, as well as on the degree of freedom afforded them to pursue truth, organize and persuade others prior to the vote. Not every government that calls itself a democracy is one in fact; actually, many totalitarian states hold elections.
A referendum majority is a simplifying conception. It takes people into a yes/no universe where a single question is to be decided according to the manner in which it is framed. It takes into account only those people who care enough to vote. And identifying the majority does nothing to improve the morality, creativity or effectiveness of the policy to be decided upon. Only the pre-vote process of free and full discussion of all relevant facts and opinions can possibly do that. A top-down granting of a vote, even if it is forced on the government, is only a partial solution to the problem.
Ariel Sharon's plan for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza is immoral. It is also strategically stupid, both politically and militarily. The Israeli Left, with all the support of the media and the government, was unable to muster more that 20,000 people to attend its big "Rally for the Majority" over the weekend - and I picked that figure because it is inflated beyond any claim of any of the supporters of Sharon's Plan and no one will bother to dispute it. The fact that even this exaggerated attendance is less than a fifth of the attendance at rallies against Sharon's Plan is obviously significant: the silent majority the left claims to represent is so silent one might doubt its very existence.
To my mind, though, the idea of a referendum is a bit beside the point. Sharon has no power to break the covenant between God and the Jews, and no right to sell the birthright of the generations of Jews yet to come. To insist on giving it away for less than nothing reveals the depths to which he has sunk, though whether of despair or self-deception I cannot tell. Nonetheless, I am in favor of something like a non-binding referendum to establish the will of the people. It would function as a poll to be taken seriously and would be helpful in identifying policy goals, as well as lending some basis in reality to claims of majority status for one opinion or another.
Ideally, the referendum would give people a range of choices formulated by those who openly support one position or the other. Let Sharon word the statements in favor of his plan and let the opponents of his plan word their statements. Thus, each voter will be counted once as for or against the overall Plan, yet he also will be able to state his main rationale, an important piece of information for policy planning.
Here is an example of what I mean:
In Favor of Sharon's Plan:
I want to forcibly evacuate the Jews from Gaza and the West Bank because...
1. It is justice, based on the idea that the land really belongs to the Arabs by international law, and Jews have no rights to live there.
2. It is a good political trade, in that we will be allowed to keep some of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
3. The Arabs will respond by arresting and disarming the terrorists.
4. Israel will be more defensible militarily if we go back to the 1967 borders.
5. Israel will not need to defend itself militarily because the US will defend us if we are attacked.
6. Israel will not need to defend itself militarily because the UN will defend us if we are attacked.
Against Sharon's Plan:
I do not want to forcibly evacuate the Jews from Gaza and the West Bank because...
1. God gave the land of Israel as an inheritance for all Jews, and we have no right to give any of it away.
2. It will be seen as a victory for terrorism and will encourage more of it.
3. A forced transfer of population based on race or religion is always wrong.
4. A forced transfer of population is unfair unless it is applied equally to Arabs and Jews.
5. As currently proposed, it is a poor bargain; we receive nothing of value in return.
6. It makes a Palestinian State a de facto reality, giving them sovereignty rights that will prevent effective anti-terrorism activities.
7. It weakens Israel's defensibility and so, encourages another Arab war against the State.
These are just suggestions, but I would love to have some real data about what most Jews think. I hate the idea that people out there are claiming to know Jewish or Israeli opinion without a factual basis for doing so. It is time to insist that such claims be supported or withdrawn. The truth is, if such a poll were to be conducted, it probably could get some publicity, especially if prominent pro-Plan figures were asked to formulate their side of the poll. There are many outlets for information now, including the internet.
Holding such a referendum would be worthwhile in other ways. It would help heal some of the pain of being overruled, because everyone could feel consulted, and it might clarify some of the fuzzy thinking that afflicts us. At the very least, the analysis from such a poll will give us a more realistic view of where we stand. And if democratic theory is correct, maybe we can use this as a means to reach a wiser decision.
The will of the masses can be wise and good, or it can be stupid and evil. After all, a majority of the nations in the world voted that Zionism is racism. A majority of Arabs assigned to the Palestinian Authority are in favor of terrorism against Jews. This limitation of wisdom in democracy is something we have faced before. We know the majority of Jews in the desert with Moses didn't want to enter Israel, a decision rued for forty years. The future is always unknown, always scary, and it is very possible for a majority to choose wrongly.
True democracy assumes that, given basic freedoms of speech, assembly and suffrage, the majority of adults will make a reasonably correct decision. However, the quality of a decision is dependent on the character of the voters and the information available to them, as well as on the degree of freedom afforded them to pursue truth, organize and persuade others prior to the vote. Not every government that calls itself a democracy is one in fact; actually, many totalitarian states hold elections.
A referendum majority is a simplifying conception. It takes people into a yes/no universe where a single question is to be decided according to the manner in which it is framed. It takes into account only those people who care enough to vote. And identifying the majority does nothing to improve the morality, creativity or effectiveness of the policy to be decided upon. Only the pre-vote process of free and full discussion of all relevant facts and opinions can possibly do that. A top-down granting of a vote, even if it is forced on the government, is only a partial solution to the problem.
Ariel Sharon's plan for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza is immoral. It is also strategically stupid, both politically and militarily. The Israeli Left, with all the support of the media and the government, was unable to muster more that 20,000 people to attend its big "Rally for the Majority" over the weekend - and I picked that figure because it is inflated beyond any claim of any of the supporters of Sharon's Plan and no one will bother to dispute it. The fact that even this exaggerated attendance is less than a fifth of the attendance at rallies against Sharon's Plan is obviously significant: the silent majority the left claims to represent is so silent one might doubt its very existence.
To my mind, though, the idea of a referendum is a bit beside the point. Sharon has no power to break the covenant between God and the Jews, and no right to sell the birthright of the generations of Jews yet to come. To insist on giving it away for less than nothing reveals the depths to which he has sunk, though whether of despair or self-deception I cannot tell. Nonetheless, I am in favor of something like a non-binding referendum to establish the will of the people. It would function as a poll to be taken seriously and would be helpful in identifying policy goals, as well as lending some basis in reality to claims of majority status for one opinion or another.
Ideally, the referendum would give people a range of choices formulated by those who openly support one position or the other. Let Sharon word the statements in favor of his plan and let the opponents of his plan word their statements. Thus, each voter will be counted once as for or against the overall Plan, yet he also will be able to state his main rationale, an important piece of information for policy planning.
Here is an example of what I mean:
In Favor of Sharon's Plan:
I want to forcibly evacuate the Jews from Gaza and the West Bank because...
1. It is justice, based on the idea that the land really belongs to the Arabs by international law, and Jews have no rights to live there.
2. It is a good political trade, in that we will be allowed to keep some of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
3. The Arabs will respond by arresting and disarming the terrorists.
4. Israel will be more defensible militarily if we go back to the 1967 borders.
5. Israel will not need to defend itself militarily because the US will defend us if we are attacked.
6. Israel will not need to defend itself militarily because the UN will defend us if we are attacked.
Against Sharon's Plan:
I do not want to forcibly evacuate the Jews from Gaza and the West Bank because...
1. God gave the land of Israel as an inheritance for all Jews, and we have no right to give any of it away.
2. It will be seen as a victory for terrorism and will encourage more of it.
3. A forced transfer of population based on race or religion is always wrong.
4. A forced transfer of population is unfair unless it is applied equally to Arabs and Jews.
5. As currently proposed, it is a poor bargain; we receive nothing of value in return.
6. It makes a Palestinian State a de facto reality, giving them sovereignty rights that will prevent effective anti-terrorism activities.
7. It weakens Israel's defensibility and so, encourages another Arab war against the State.
These are just suggestions, but I would love to have some real data about what most Jews think. I hate the idea that people out there are claiming to know Jewish or Israeli opinion without a factual basis for doing so. It is time to insist that such claims be supported or withdrawn. The truth is, if such a poll were to be conducted, it probably could get some publicity, especially if prominent pro-Plan figures were asked to formulate their side of the poll. There are many outlets for information now, including the internet.
Holding such a referendum would be worthwhile in other ways. It would help heal some of the pain of being overruled, because everyone could feel consulted, and it might clarify some of the fuzzy thinking that afflicts us. At the very least, the analysis from such a poll will give us a more realistic view of where we stand. And if democratic theory is correct, maybe we can use this as a means to reach a wiser decision.